PEARL Saverplan Policy mis sold

bertybond

Pearl sold me a with profits saver plan 15 years ago. At thetime I was going to start a regular saver in to a building society but was toldthat this product would perform much better than a building society account. Afact find sheet was completed and one fact in particular was emphasised aroundthe stock market growing 10 times that of building societies. This was the keypoint which was pushed to me and the main reason I made the decision I did.

I have paid in a total of £3600 over the last 15 years at£20/month. The numbers used for the illustration were 5% 7.5% and 10%. Althoughthe only guarantee was for £2812.00 it was inferred that I could ignore thewarning that these were not guaranteed.

On maturity I was sent a check for £3694.10. This is areturn of just £94.10 in 15 years.

I have complained to Pearl and they have offered me afurther £122 stating that a fact finding sheet highlighted I did not need lifecover when I took out this product so I would get this back. Otherwise the factfind suggested I had a balanced approach to risk. This apparently means I was preparedto make a loss on this investment?

What is more frustrating now that I am older and wiser I wouldnever have taken out such a product.

Looking at the illustration of 5%PA growth over the 15 yearsonly shows a return of £3990. If I had paid the same money in to a buildingsociety account returning 1.5% I would have got that return and it would havebeen guaranteed.

Do I have anywhere to go on this?

opinions4u

Poor performance is not a reason for upholding a mis-selling claim.

No need for life cover is, and they have corrected that.

The 5% - 10% figures were mandatory illustrations required by the regulator of the day.

I suspect you have no further to go on this.

jimjames

Unfortunately this is a perfect example of why these kind of plans should be avoided like the plague.

Good commission and return for the company selling them but not for the poor investor.

dunstonh

I have complained to Pearl and they have offered me afurther £122 stating that a fact finding sheet highlighted I did not need lifecover when I took out this product so I would get this back. Otherwise the factfind suggested I had a balanced approach to risk. This apparently means I was preparedto make a loss on this investment?

Most people accept some risk on long term regular contributions. So, if you say you wouldn't that puts you in a tiny minority. Do you have shares, a pension or other investments?

What is more frustrating now that I am older and wiser I wouldnever have taken out such a product.

Of course you wouldnt now but things were different in 1997.

Unfortunately this is a perfect example of why these kind of plans should be avoided like the plague.

pearl closed for business a decade ago and stopped retailing the Saverplan to mainstream around 1999.

bertybond

I had used and trusted Pearl before for similar products and had got thereturns I expected not understanding the product as well as I should have done anddepending on the trust I had built with the company was I now understand naïve

I was going to start paying in to a building society regular saver accountbut changed my mind after my visit from the man from Pearl because I was told thisproduct was a "safe alternative" and was talked about as a sure thing.One of the "facts" that was pointed out on the "Fact FindSheet" was that stocks and shares out perform building societies by 10times.

I signed to say the risks where explained to me in retrospect I don’t believethis to be the case. Unfortunately I guess it is my word against theirs on thismatter.

In the illustration I received if the investments had grown at 7.5% I wouldhave received a return of £1050 this against a profit of £1860 for the Pearl.The first time I ever read this properly was last week when the information wasprovided back to me by Pearl

Just to clarify the point on “the older and wiser” looking at the amount ofcosts associated with the plan which I believed to be low risk I would havebeen better investing somewhere else.

If I had put my money in to a building society over the same period at a average3% rate I would have made the same profit but without the risk

It doesn’t sound like I have much hope of pursuing thisfurther but thank you for the inputs all good food for thought

dunstonh

Just to clarify the point on “the older and wiser” looking at the amount ofcosts associated with the plan which I believed to be low risk I would havebeen better investing somewhere else.

The plan was low risk. Ironically, had you gone higher risk (or medium risk) then you would have seen more.

Ifts

Majority of these plans were not very profitable for the end user, some have ended up getting back less than they have paid in to them.

I took a With Profits policy with Scottish Widows back in 1992, when I didn't know any better Mine was £50 a month for 20 years, so this October it will mature & I will know the total return I will get back (luckily for me its more than I have paid in, but how much more I won't know till October).

Details of what mine has returned through annual bonuses so far over the years in this post:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=50194735&postcount=38